Corcoran

This is a suit in equity for an injunction and accounting to restrain the infringement by defendant of two patents. The inventions relate to methods of tile roof construction.

The court at the close of the hearing held the two patents in suit to be valid. The two remaining unsettled issues are:

1. The scope that is attributable to the claims of the patents, and particularly the earlier one, to wit, No. 1,854,660, in the light of the state of the prior art that has been shown in this suit; and

2. The sufficiency of the evidence of infringement by the defendant of any claim in suit.

All claims of the first patent and solely claim 11 of patent 1,948,510 are involved.

The former of these issues does not require much elaboration. The grant of the letters patent is prima facie evidence that the patentees are the first inventors of the device and method described in the patent, and of its novelty. Mumm v. Decker & Sons, 57 S.Ct. 675 , 81 L.Ed. -, April 26, 1937. And the burden of proving want of novelty is heavy and rests upon the defendant who avers it. It must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Mumm v. Decker & Sons, supra. The required degree of proof has not been made.

The…